All Activity

Yes, either the map team should come up with their own company name and be a single entity with both SA and Kola map under it, or the SA map should be transferred to ORBX to avoid confusion for the users. Maybe one of the issues is the assets that came with the SA map. Who knows if their part of the map, or Razbam. We see now that other Razmab assets might also be removed from DCS like the Tarawa and the KC-130. Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

Sorry, i use an online translator Map Persian Gulf. Airport : Sharjah Intl Freq ; 250.200 But information of Novorossiysk (Map Caucase) Best regards Christian

Yes it might get sold off and taken on as a going concern by someone else but it isn't an absolute given.

Thats how business's act never mind people, they put their own interests above others. ED put their own interests above others Razbam put their own interests above others

They'd be more reluctant to say that they are, indeed, adhering to the settlement. If they made such a claim it would, if it was false, be a potential liability and something for RAZBAM's lawyers to bite into. Note that Ron's ramblings, for all their skewedness, had not contained any statement of fact that wasn't true. ED had made a statement of fact here, and there's no reason to doubt it. In such situations, the IP typically gets sold off (see the other sim, minus the source leak). It'd likely go to some shady corporation only interested in continuing to get money from module sales while putting absolutely zero effort into maintenance other than keeping the license servers running. As long as no serious competition arises, sales will continue at some level, which, once the small cost of acquiring the IP at a bankrupcy auction is paid off, are basically free money.

Thanks all - reported for investigation.

Is this a simulator or not? My problem now is not that the Sniper is bad (coming from the Lantirn on the Strike Eagle, it feels like a GREAT improvement) but that the litening is just too good in comparision. Also, the Litening V4 from razbam has X16 digital zoom where you can watch the face of a Stinger trooper from 25 NM, where all you should be able to see is a smudge.

Well as I said I own those modules and have them installed. Just found the icons, problem solved. thanks!!

I'm not following how the water-injection via detent thing works. For example in combat at 3,000ft MSL or so I have the throttle at max forward (past that detent) yet I'm only pulling 45-50" (-ish, can't tell because of the spastic needles). I should be getting 56.5 according to the manual.

I mean I can't say you're wrong but overall I don't do anything whatsoever with the kinematics of an AGM-88C, but I do know it's not a silver bullet that's for sure, at least in the sim. As for real life we'll have to have somebody who actually fired them to weigh in, because I'm not that guy.

I hope is for the Carrier Ops.

Res. of Cockpit Displays affects this according to my tests. The "Every Frame" variant of the options don't seem to be necessary. However, to take effect, you have to restart DCS. This is why it took me a bit to figure it out, because I was just changing the setting and loading right into a mission for testing and nothing changed.

I view this differently also, not saying you're wrong. About the later part: I think PvE environments, at least the ones I'm attracted to (dynamic campaigns, mission generators etc), are not target rich that badly. Taking down as many aircraft you can instead of working with micro and macro strategies are much less rewarding for me personally. When I mentioned PvE-Co-op, it was more about strategy and tactics instead of killing spree against AI. My bad, bud. I remember early MiG-21 days. Hoping into that thing against F-15Cs and other fast movers was a thrill I think extinct. It was quite an event. I'm personally glad I got to experience Flaming Cliffs 3 golden era where you had Eagles vs Fulcrums and Flankers on 104th servers, after that, everything became weird with Hornets vs Vipers all the time. Don't we all? I believe that mission designers should commit to their 'artwork' and not external pressure as the later is the definition of 'artwork' death. The best type of missions and PvP environments came alive from the few to the many, not the inverse, imo. Is down to the mission designer. If they put the 35 in, their loss on the mission breaking and being unpopular. ED has already stated more red stuff coming after the 29A if that's a success in sales as that team needs to make revenue by itself. There are also external factors that we don't know all about. So I'd rather not worry about PvP balance as hoping for anything remotely close outside Flaming Cliffs is in vain. I'll stick to PvE and enjoying the sights that made me stick to DCS in a constant basis for 3 years straight now. Sorry to derail into a large post and the thread is not about this. All of you have a nice/blessed/delightful week and enjoy what you like the most.

As mentioned I think sim app pro needs to check where they are taking the icons from. If its from the DCS demomods folder they wont be able to fetch them as they are no longer there. The icons will only show on the dcs main menu for people who have them installed as the icons are in dcs root, mods aircraft folder.

Yes hotfix planned for today

@BIGNEWY I own all those modules and they are installed. Still not showing up in SimappPro. What is a solution to solve this? below the screenshots before and after the last DCS update: also DCS.log: === Log opened UTC 2025-07-28 11:37:36 2025-07-28 11:37:37.636 INFO EDCORE (Main): Platform Timer Resolution: 15.44ms 2025-07-28 11:37:38.112 INFO EDCORE (Main): Created boot pool: n:16 2025-07-28 11:37:38.113 INFO APP (Main): Command line: "C:\Program Files\Eagle Dynamics\DCS World OpenBeta\bin/DCS.exe" 2025-07-28 11:37:38.113 INFO APP (Main): DCS/2.9.18.12722 (x86_64; MT; Windows NT 10.0.22631) 2025-07-28 11:37:38.113 INFO APP (Main): Application revision: 252722 2025-07-28 11:37:38.113 INFO APP (Main): Renderer revision: 26305 2025-07-28 11:37:38.113 INFO APP (Main): Terrain revision: 26363 2025-07-28 11:37:38.113 INFO APP (Main): Build number: 364 2025-07-28 11:37:38.113 INFO APP (Main): CPU cores: 24, threads: 32, System RAM: 130902 MB, Pagefile: 8192 MB 2025-07-28 11:37:38.113 INFO APP (Main): CPU info: system affinity mask: 11111111111111111111111111111111 process affinity mask: 1111111111111111 CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM) i9-14900KF [1x L3 caches] CPU has uniform cache size 36 MB (per cache) all CPU cores have the same efficiency class 1 CPU cores have different performance classes: [1-2] logical cores with performance class 2: {8, 9, 10, 11} logical cores with performance class 1: {0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 12, 13, 14, 15} common cores: {4, 5, 6, 7, 12, 13, 14, 15} render cores: {8, 9, 10, 11, 0, 1, 2, 3} IO cores: {} unavailable cores: {16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31} pause10: 0.029546 us (std dev: 0.023914) pause10: 932 cycles (std dev: 654.3) 2025-07-28 11:37:38.132 WARNING APP (Main): ProcessLasso is running 2025-07-28 11:37:38.267 INFO EDCORE (Main): Loaded C:/Program Files/Eagle Dynamics/DCS World OpenBeta/bin/edWebViewBrowser.dll 2025-07-28 11:37:39.969 INFO ASYNCNET (5652): Login success. 2025-07-28 11:37:44.385 ERROR ASYNCNET (Main): HTTP request dcs:authdata failed with error 99: Unrecoverable error in select/poll 2025-07-28 11:37:44.385 ERROR ASYNCNET (Main): Auth failed with code -99. === Log closed. null

Interesting! Hotfix, patch Today.

Super precise INS for this missile would mean that it does not need expensive seeker, once the position of the target is determined (e.g. pre-launch on carrier), it would simply be enough to use it's INS without GPS if this was a real thing. Sadly, this is not the case and even the later version you mentioned had to have GPS updates for this particular reason. Depending on the mode the trajectory can be calculated based on the rough distance or without it in which case only the angular position can be used. Furthermore range/azimuth estimation is very rough at the start and requires to be constantly updated with the corrections based on the seeker readings. E.g. firing HARM at long distance and loosing signal earlier would result in much higher miss distance than e.g. firing it from just 5km away. As the distance at which the HARM is fired is longer, the time required to reach the target is also longer, and the drift of the INS will be progressing and cumulative. At the current state in DCS you can fire HARMs for 100-ish km away and still get it to hit the target with accuracy, simply this is not realistic. One additional note: thanks to this change HARM now also hits objects that move. This involves e.g. Tor (features ability to move and shoot), but e.g. very maneuvering Su-27 while it is jamming. To conclude this change was half baked and results in yet another departure from realism.

It behaves strangely, the scanning time is random. I achieved the longest time only without the AI gui.

Wenn ich nichts übersehe, haben wir hier im deutschen Teil des Forums noch keinen Thread für allgemein wissenswerte Schnipsel, die nicht direkt mit DCS oder Luftfahrt zu tun haben, dabei zu interessant sind, um gänzlich unerwähnt zu bleiben, aber nicht interessant genug für einen eigenen Thread. Zum Auftakt gibt es die Empfehlung, die Nvidia-Treiber zu aktualisieren. https://www.heise.de/news/Sicherheitsupdates-Schadcode-Luecken-in-GPU-Treibern-von-Nvidia-geschlossen-10501190.html Nvidia hat in den neuesten Treibern teils kritische Sicherheitslücken geschlossen. Falls ihr eure Treiber von Hand aktualisiert, wäre jetzt ein guter Zeitpunkt für ein Update.

Here is another log that doesnt fail the integrity check, i was messing with shadows and taa to make that go away to no avail. Still happens. dcs.log

Keep in mind that this is merely what they are claiming and that 'good faith' is one of these vague terms that is rather meaningless unless it comes from an independent third party like a judge. People tend to see it as good faith on their part even if they put their own interests above those of others, because that's just how people are. Do you think that ED (or anyone else) would ever say about themselves that they acted in bad faith? Since almost no one ever says that they acted in bad faith, it is also not worth that much if people say that they acted in good faith.

Looks like it's not decided yet:

I haven't used the map in a long time, thought I give it another try, still incredibly hard to find any place on the map that doesn't look terrible. Houses half dug into hills, terrible low quality texture with some higher texture slaped on top of it. Almost all mountains are low quality textures. I spent 10 minutes placing ground units all over the map, but finally gave up and just placed the ground units on the green parts a few km from the Helmand river, this still seems to be the only place with a few km2 of real estate on the map that doesn't get ruined by low textures and bad odd terrain artifacts, but the river itself is still bad.

Release Version Current version number: DCS 2.9.18.12722 Next planned update: Hotfix patch 28th July 2025 ( subject to change )